If you look closely at the new College, or Council, or whatever, you will see that nothing much has changed.The BCTF still holds 'sway' over 8 of 15 voting members.it is the disciplinary board that seems to be a little different.I am looking forward to seeing how they handle Avison's 201 'complaints'So far Nothing, despite these being reported in 2010.

As far as bargaining, free collective bargaining is a must. But there need to be time limits and then rapid movement to short mediation and then final, BINDING ARBITRATION. Chicago teachers used this successfully and agreed to a longer school day as a trade off.

However, to get this there needs to be all party agreement and the current govt. just will not agree. So, I suspect it will be up to the NDP to consult and approach this from a more balanced perspective,

George+ wrote:If you look closely at the new College, or Council, or whatever, you will see that nothing much has changed.The BCTF still holds 'sway' over 8 of 15 voting members.it is the disciplinary board that seems to be a little different.I am looking forward to seeing how they handle Avison's 201 'complaints'So far Nothing, despite these being reported in 2010.

The new disciplinary board will not be controlled by the BCTF and that's what's changed. It looks like you've done a 180 and now think it only "seems to be a little different." Have a talk with your friend Susan Lambert and tell her that . . . ha ha ha ha . . . It's actually quite different, George, and different in a very good way! Not being controlled by the BCTF means that the new disciplinary board will serve the public interest while also providing due process for teachers. Except for some union activists who don't put kids first most of us see this as a welcome change!

As for those 270 complaints which I see you now have whittled down to only 201 I've already patiently explained to you that some of these complaints go back to 2003 so some of the "kids" involved are likely now parents. Perhaps they've graduated from university or trade school and have jobs and yet when these complaints, that are now ancient history, are not dealt with by the new disciplinary board you'll say, "See, see, see . . . there was nothing there." Wrong, wrong, wrong George. You're fooling no one! No one George! Keep trying but I'll be watching . . . and having fun!

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."- Winston Churchill

So you're saying the new and better. disciplinary board will have no authority to do anything about the 271 complaints?

Could it be because they were mostly quite minor AND rejected by the registrar for exactly that?

Take a close look at the minutes of the new council. Met once in April/May this year and once in October.Very divided voting already-no surprise? Not likely to engender a lot of confidence.Nothing much has changed.

A whole teachers college set up to handle only 270 complaints made against teachers in the past 8 years? Let's see - that's 270 divided by 8 equals 34 complaints per year or 1 complaint for every 1200 teachers (.08%). Surely these complaints could be handled at the local district level, freeing up these resources ($$$) to help our kids.

George+ wrote:So you're saying the new and better. disciplinary board will have no authority to do anything about the 271 complaints?

Could it be because they were mostly quite minor AND rejected by the registrar for exactly that?

Take a close look at the minutes of the new council. Met once in April/May this year and once in October.Very divided voting already-no surprise? Not likely to engender a lot of confidence.Nothing much has changed.

It has nothing to do with "authority" but everything to do with the time that has passed and it's highly unlikely that all of the complaints were trivial in nature. It's now a matter of public record that the BCTF was controlling the College and they got caught. The whistle-blowers did the right thing and I applaud them. These were union guys too, George, but they were able to set aside their union loyalties and think about the welfare of students and the public interest. Good for them!

No, the new disciplinary board won't be meeting on a daily basis but they will meet when it's necessary. And no, I don't suppose that every decision will be a unanimous one. The key thing, though, is that the union does not control the board and that's a good thing. Now, a teacher could step out of line and the union reps could say he or she shouldn't be disciplined but they would be out-numbered by a majority of non-union reps who would vote to discipline the teacher.

I think you get it but the sour grapes are overwhelming you. Retired teachers and union activists should still put the students first. Shame on you for not doing that.

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."- Winston Churchill

George+ wrote:A whole teachers college set up to handle only 270 complaints made against teachers in the past 8 years? Let's see - that's 270 divided by 8 equals 34 complaints per year or 1 complaint for every 1200 teachers (.08%). Surely these complaints could be handled at the local district level, freeing up these resources ($$$) to help our kids.

Those were the public complaints, i.e. those made directly to the College from parents, grandparents etc. There were lots of other complaints as well that came from school districts. You actually know that since you've pointed it out yourself but here you are again deliberately misrepresenting the facts to try and fool people. And you're failing miserably.

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."- Winston Churchill

And how much money did the BCTF spend to make sure they held control for those 4 years? That would be interesting to find out. Actually it would be really interesting to find out where all the money really gets spent.

IF corporations taking in tens of millions a year and spending it for their own special interests and corruption occur why would you think a union doing a similar amount of money would be immune to it? Because they have "Ideals"? Churches have ideals and theft, misspending and corruption has been found there too.

The BCTF has shown they can be corrupt and self serving and bypass complaints because they had enough money and power and control of committees to do so.

Perhaps tighter reviews should be performed to ensure that the teachers are truly being served by the people that take 30-40 million from them each year.

Contrary to what George suggests the new Council and Disciplinary Board are less expensive tu run than the BCCT was. Here's a very informative post by Carol Gibson in which she relates some of the sorded history of the BCCT. The BCTF blew it. Their strategy blew up in their face and teachers have now lost the right to self-regulation. While other professions have had the maturity to self-regulate the BCTF made that impossible for teachers in this province. Instead of blaming the government teachers need to look at the BCTF and make some fundamental changes in their union.

Teaching in BC: profession or trade union?Carol Gibson April 13, 2012

When it comes to teaching are trade unions appropriate?Jan Drabek’s opinion article in The Vancouver Sun raised a number of critical issues related to teaching as currently organized in BC. Drabek characterizes the current organizational model as similar to a trades union. He also poses a critical question:

“Wouldn’t it be wise for teachers to at least explore the possibilities of re-organizing along the lines of these professions – architects, doctors, lawyers and even professional artists?”

The history in BC that addresses this question is disturbing. It suggests that the BCTF, from its command and control position in relation to teachers and education in BC, is not capable of working within a mature professional context. In fact, by its own admission, the BCTF systematically worked to ensure that professional self-regulation, as organized within other professions, would fail when teachers in BC were granted this opportunity. (Novakowski, 2010)

Mature established professions, medicine, law, engineering as examples, organized early to demand of governments that they recognize these areas of practice as self-regulating professions. Practitioners understood that their members required comprehensive knowledge within a discipline as well as the ability to use their knowledge in a practice that served members of the public.

In Canada, governments typically supported professional self-regulation. They recognize the specialized knowledge and specialized practice required of practitioners as well as the need for practitioners to be involved in certifying and regulating members of the profession. Mature professions take their self regulation responsibilities seriously, guard this professional obligation and ensure that their decisions as well as actions serve a public interest.

Within mature self-regulating professions regulatory functions are separated from political advocacy functions. For example, the Canadian Medical Association advocates for the political interests of the medical profession; the College of Physicians and Surgeons is the regulatory body responsible for certification, discipline and continuing professional education. In law, the Canadian Bar Association represents the political interests of lawyers; the Law Society regulates the profession with similar responsibilities as those specified for medicine.What is the history related to teaching in BC? In 1987 government enacted the Teaching Profession Act. It granted to teachers the right to self-regulate through the BC College of Teachers. Teachers were given a gift. They were recognized as a profession. They were granted the rights and obligations of other mature self-regulating professions.The BCTF responded forcefully and negatively to this gift. It was seen as a threat to the BCTF ability to command and to control teaching and education within BC. Ken Novakowski in the September 2010 issue of Teacher summed up the BCTF response succinctly: “After debating the merits of boycotting the college or participating in the college to limit its scope of activity (emphasis added) the BCTF decided on the latter.”

15 of 20 (75%) of the members of College Council were endorsed by the BCTF. These endorsed Councilors understood their role to “mitigate the negative aspects” of the college “and to stem its growth and cost to members” (Novakowski 2010). These endorsed Councilors also met with BCTF executive before each Council meeting to ensure that BCTF interests were paramount in all business of the College.In 2003, after 15 years of attempting to self-regulate in the face of BCTF organized resistance and interference, government intervened and appointed 20 Councilors – a completely new Council. It is ironic that Novakwoski describes these appointments “as political hacks” and fails to acknowledge that the previous BCTF endorsed and elected Councilors whom the appointees replaced were “political hacks” for the BCTF.

In fact, a majority of appointees to this “Interim Council” comprised recognized and professional educators from across the province. A minority were appointed on the recommendation education partner groups such as those representing trustees, parents, Aboriginal educators and Faculties of Education.

Between 2003 and 2010, the BC College of Teachers continued to exist. Council went back to 15 BCTF endorsed and elected members and 5 appointed members. By 2008 at least 2 of BCTF elected members began seriously to question whether the BCTF campaign of resistance was consistent with the Oath of Office required of Councilors. This Oath necessitated “acting in the public interest”. They also seriously questioned the BCTF rhetoric asserting that “the interests of the BCTF as the teacher’s union are the same as with the public interest”.

The BCTF continued its active and relentless campaign to limit the ability of the College to self-regulate in the public interest. Finally, at the request of the then Chair of Council, the Registrar and the appointed Councilors government appointed Don Avison to review the College. In January 2012 the Teaching Profession Act was replaced by the Teachers Act. The BC College of Teachers was replaced by the Teacher Regulation Branch of the Ministry of Education. Teachers effectively lost their opportunity to claim status as a profession and to self-regulate.The BCTF permits no interference with its assumed mandate to control teachers and public education in BC. Unlike the nursing profession which is able to separate the role of its union from the role of its professional regulatory body, the BCTF continues to view a professional self-regulatory body as well as all education partner groups as its competitors in the sector. Just as they have been largely incapable of bargaining without being legislated back to work, they have been equally incapable of working positively to achieve mature professional status for their members.

George+ wrote:The REGISTRAR decided most of the complaints were NOT significant.

BCTF spending is decided by the membership at many Representative Assemblies.AND at an Annual General Meeting. Not to mention numerous local meetings.

It is probably one of the most democratic unions around.

If you think one meeting a year attended by a minority of the members truly makes the call as to where every penny really goes you are delusional. That's the same as thinking that the Wal-Mart AGM gets together to sign the cheques for items purchased next year.

Chartered Accountants - professionals - Have a board of their peers to review complaints and determine what happens for discipline. This has worked well for a very long time.

Lawyers - professionals - Have a board of their peers to review complaints and determine what happens for discipline. This has worked well for years.

Teachers - not professionals - found to be unable to properly self regulate themselves for matters of complaints and professional conduct. This has worked poorly for many years and they have now lost the ability to do so.

Urbane, you have to know where Jan Drabek comes from to understand his right wing diatribe.

In fact, BOTH the Medical and Legal Professions have the same role as the BCTF.They advocate for their members at disciplinary hearings, also.And if you believe they never go on strike, then you truly live in la la land and must not read anything. In fact they would like to be more like unions.

I'm heading out for a few hours, George, so I'll leave you to your BCTF talking points. Those talking points don't even fool the NDP education critic (Robin Austin) though and they certainly don't fool most members of the public. Bye for now George.

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."- Winston Churchill